Denzin and Lincoln (1994) provided a generic definition of qualitative research,
that is, "Qualitative research is multimethod in focus, involving an interpretive,
naturalist approach to its subject matter." The 'multimethod in focus'
is described as "the combination of multiple methods, empirical materials,
perspectives and observers in a single study is best understood, then as a strategy
that adds rigor, breadth, and depth to any investigation." (Flick, 1992).

Creswell (1998) gave his definition of qualitative research focusing on the
methodological nature, the complexity of the end product and its nature of the
naturalistic inquiry:

"Qualitative research is an inquiry process of understanding based on
distinct methodological traditions of inquiry that explore a social or human
problem. The research builds a complex, holistic pictures, analyzes words,
reports detailed views of informants, and conducted the study in natural setting."
(p. 15)

Gall, Borg, and Gall (1996) defined qualitative research as the "inquiry
that is grounded in the assumption that individuals construct social reality
in the form of individuals construct social reality in the form of meanings
and interpretations, and that these constructions tend to be transitory and
situational. The dominant methodology is to discover these meanings and interpretations
by studying cases intensively in natural settings an subjecting the resulting
data to analytical induction."

Generally speaking, qualitative research is oriented toward understanding of
a natural world, and is highly interpretive in nature. The purpose of a qualitative
research is not to verify a causal relationship by falsifying a no-relationship
hypothesis. Instead, it recognizes the multifaceted interpretations of human
experience, and the iterative relation within social and cultural systems. The
focus of a qualitative research is on understanding how people make sense of
their world with exploitation of different aspects and different expressions.
It provides both the researchers and the participants with a discovering experience.

What are the characteristics of qualitative research?
Denzin and Lincoln (1994) used a metaphor of bricoleur as researcher and bricololage
as a solution using different tools in qualitative research:

It sheds light on the nature of "emergent construction" in qualitative
research.

It also indicates the inevitability of influences from the researcher's
personal position, e.g. the epistemological beliefs, theoretical standing,
personal history, gender, social class, race and ethnicity.

It also indicates the complexity of the research product as "complex,
dense, reflective, collagelike creation that represents the researcher's images,
understanding and interpretations of the world or phenomenon under analysis."

Ragin's (1987) comparative list of the characteristics of qualitative research
had the following descriptions:

Natural setting as source of data

Researcher as key instrument of data collection

Data collected as words or pictures

Outcome as process rather than product

Analysis of data inductively, attention to particular

Focus on participants' perspectives, their meaning

Use of expressive language

Persuasion by reason

What are the rationales of doing a qualitative research?
Creswell (1998) gave his reasons why to undertake a qualitative study:

It derives from the nature of the research question: Quantitative research
is designed to verify theoretical hypotheses about a casual relationship among
certain variables; thus, the questions are usually framed to examine whether
a certain condition exists to test the plausibility of a theoretical explanation
of why. On the contrary, qualitative research pursues what and how questions
to get a deeper understanding of an observed phenomenon.

Exploration of a topic to develop theories

Needs to present a detailed view of a topic

Studying in a natural setting

Interest in writing in a literary style

Sufficient time and resources to spend on extensive data collection in the
filed and detailed data analysis

Audiences are receptive to qualitative study

Emphasis on the researcher's role as an active learner instead of an expert
judging research participants.

Denzin and Lincoln (1994, 2000) divided the history of qualitative research
into five phases in the 20th century:

Traditional period (1900-WWII): there are four major beliefs and
commitments:

Objective: a valid, reliable, and objective interpretations in their writing

A complicity with imperialism

A belief in monumentalism: a museumlick picture of the culture studied

A belief of timelessness

The modernist Phase (Postwar to 1970s): qualitative research
started to be formalized; postpositivism functioned as a powerful epistemological
paradigm in this moment

Blurred Genres (1970-1986): qualitative researcher had a full complement
of paradigms, methods, and strategies to employ in their research.

Crisis of Representation (mid-1908s): qualitative research in this
period calls into question the issues of gender, class, and race; critical
and feminist epistemologies

The fifth Moment (the present): this phase is defined and shaped
by the dual crisis of representation and legitimization that confronts the
qualitative researcher. The questions include whether the qualitative researchers
can directly capture lived experience, and how qualitative studies to be evaluated
in the poststructural moment.

What are the criteria to judge the value of the research?
In quantitative research, reliability, validity, generalizability and objectivity
are the criteria. In qualitative study, Rossman and Rallis (1998) makes the
judgment in terms of the following principles:

The truth value of the research: to judge the truth value depends on "how
adequately multiple understandings are presented and whether they ring true,
i.e. to have face validity. Five strategies are suggested to obtain this truthfulness:

Gather data over a period of time or intensively rather than in a one-shot
manner

Share the interpretations of the emerging findings with participants

Design the study as participatory or action research from beginning to end

Triangulate, i.e. to draw from several data sources, methods, investigators,
or theories to strengthen the robustness of your work

Contextualize the findings to the specific setting and participants, i.e.
the conclusions are bounded by time and space.

The rigor of the research: in quantitative research: being replicable
is one of the criteria to judge quantitative research. In qualitative research,
it is the thinking process of the researcher that really matters. Was the
study well conceived and conducted? Are the decisions clear? Was sufficient
evidence gathered and presented? Was the researcher rigorous in searching
for alternative explanations for what was learned? Are different interpretations
put forward and assessed?

The significance of the research, i.e. its applicability to other situation.
"To establish the usefulness of a study, provide rich, thick description
of your theoretical and methodological orientation and the process as well
as the results." (Rossman & Rallis, 1998)

Concept of Triangulation
Triangulation is a tool to support the researcher's construction. It is a process
by which the researcher can guard against the accusation that a study's findings
are simply an artifact of a single method, a single source, or a single investigator's
biases. The function of triangulation is to locate and reveal the understanding
of the object under investigation from "different aspects of empirical
reality" (Denzin, 1978). Denzin (1978) has identified four basic types
of triangulation:

Data triangulation: Checking out the consistency of different data
sources, i.e. comparing and cross-checking the consistency of information
derived at different times and by different means within qualitative methods.
For example, compare observational data with the interview data; compare what
people say in public with what they say in private; check for consistency
of what people say about the same thing over time; compare the perspectives
of people from different points of view. However, such comparison does not
always mean to find the consistency. Instead, sometimes it helps to study
and to understand when and why there are differences.

Investigator triangulation: Using several different researchers or
evaluators to review the findings in order to reduce potential bias.

Theory triangulation: Using multiple perspectives or theories to
interpret the data, i.e. examining the data from the perspectives of different
stakeholder positions with different theories of actions.

Methodological triangulation: Checking out the consistency of findings
generated by different data-collection method

The issues for qualitative research are more about transferability, faithfulness,
and dependability rather than reliability and validity. As a qualitative
researcher, your job is to give thick descriptions so that readers are able
to make decisions to see whether the results of the inquiry are transferable.
The conceptual analysis must be faithfully derived from the data and be checked
out against the consistency of different data sources. Moreover, because the
meaning of communication depends on knowing the relevant context, and contexts
are consciously designed to evoke multiple meanings (Dye, 1998), qualitative
research must develop thorough and comprehensive descriptions of the context.
With trustworthiness, it is important for researchers to pose the questions
about neutrality: How can one establish the degree to which the findings of
an inquiry are determined by the participants and conditions of the inquiry
and not by the biases, motivations, interests or perspectives of the inquirer
(Lincoln and Guba, 1985)? It does not mean that there must be exclusion of presuppositions.
Rather, qualitative researchers need to recognize their thoughts as an inalienable
factor that guides their interpretation. The recognition of the inevitability
of subjectivity also yields the process of triangulation that utilizes the use
of multiple sources, methods, investigators, and theories (Creswell, 1998, Lincoln
and Guba, 1985; Patton, 1990) to ensure the credibility of the research."

Patton (1990) advises that there are three issues that a credible qualitative
study needs to address:
1. What techniques and methods were used to ensure the integrity, validity and
accuracy of the findings?
2. What does the researcher bring to the study in terms of qualifications, experience,
and perspective?
3. What paradigm orientation and assumptions undergrid the study?